APPENDIX II.

VII. The symbolic books of theBohemians,-are,

1.The Confession of faith of the Calixtines and Taborites, signed at the Synod of Cuttenburgh in 1541;2.The Confession of the faith of the Bohemians,-inserted in the "Harmony of Confessions," published at Cambridge in 1680.3.The Consent of faith at Sendomer.

1.The Confession of faith of the Calixtines and Taborites, signed at the Synod of Cuttenburgh in 1541;

2.The Confession of the faith of the Bohemians,-inserted in the "Harmony of Confessions," published at Cambridge in 1680.

3.The Consent of faith at Sendomer.

VIII. The symbolic book of the ARMINIANS,-is

The Declaration of the Remonstrants, drawn up by Episcopius, and signed in 1622.

The Declaration of the Remonstrants, drawn up by Episcopius, and signed in 1622.

IX. The symbolic book of the SOCINIANS isThe Catechism of Racow;-the best edition of it was published in 1609, reprinted at Frankfort, in 1739. An English translation of it has been published by Mr. Rees.

X. The UNITARIANS have no symbolic book. To Doctor Lardner'sLetter on the Logosthey shew universal respect.

XI. The symbolic books of THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND,-are,

1.The Theological Oaths,-containing a Declaration of the belief of the Monarch's spiritual supremacy;-and Declarations against Transubstantiation,-the invocation of Saints,-and the sacrifice of the Mass;2.The Thirty-nine Articles.

1.The Theological Oaths,-containing a Declaration of the belief of the Monarch's spiritual supremacy;-and Declarations against Transubstantiation,-the invocation of Saints,-and the sacrifice of the Mass;

2.The Thirty-nine Articles.

XII. The symbolic book of the ENGLISH AND SCOTTISH PRESBYTERIANS,-is

"The Articles of Religionapproved and passed by both Houses of Parliament after advice had with an assembly of divines, called together for that purpose." These were sent into Scotland, and immediately sanctioned by the General Assembly, and Parliament of that kingdom; and thus became a law of the Church and State.

"The Articles of Religionapproved and passed by both Houses of Parliament after advice had with an assembly of divines, called together for that purpose." These were sent into Scotland, and immediately sanctioned by the General Assembly, and Parliament of that kingdom; and thus became a law of the Church and State.

XIII. The symbolic books of the Anabaptists may be said to be,-

THEIR SEVERAL CONFESSIONS OF FAITH:-Five were published at Amsterdam, in 1675, in one volume 8vo.

THEIR SEVERAL CONFESSIONS OF FAITH:-Five were published at Amsterdam, in 1675, in one volume 8vo.

XIV. The symbolic books of the Quakers,-are,

1.Barclay's Catechism and Confession of Faith, published in 1675;2. HisTheses Theologicæ;3. HisApology,-a logical demonstration of the propositions in the Theses. It was translated into almost every language and presented to all the ministers assembled at Nimeguen;4. But some persons assert that the real doctrines of the Quakers are more easily discoverable fromThe Christian Quaker and his divine testimony, vindicated by Scripture reason and authorities against the injurious attempts that have been lately made by several adversaries.-This work appeared in 1674; the first part of it was written by Penn, the second by Whithead, one of his most distinguished disciples.

1.Barclay's Catechism and Confession of Faith, published in 1675;

2. HisTheses Theologicæ;

3. HisApology,-a logical demonstration of the propositions in the Theses. It was translated into almost every language and presented to all the ministers assembled at Nimeguen;

4. But some persons assert that the real doctrines of the Quakers are more easily discoverable fromThe Christian Quaker and his divine testimony, vindicated by Scripture reason and authorities against the injurious attempts that have been lately made by several adversaries.-This work appeared in 1674; the first part of it was written by Penn, the second by Whithead, one of his most distinguished disciples.

XV. It may be added, that the symbolic book of the Jews,-is

The Schelosch aikara ikkarim,-the Thirteen Articles of Faithframed by Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon in the 12th century: it is frequently inserted in the Jewish prayer books. Sebastian Munster published it with a Latin translation and an abridgment of the History of Josephus, in one vol. 8vo. at Worms in 1529.

The Schelosch aikara ikkarim,-the Thirteen Articles of Faithframed by Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon in the 12th century: it is frequently inserted in the Jewish prayer books. Sebastian Munster published it with a Latin translation and an abridgment of the History of Josephus, in one vol. 8vo. at Worms in 1529.

Many Christian Catechisms have been translated into Hebrew for the benefit of the Jews.

An historical and literary account of all these Confessions of Faith, and of several works and circumstances connected with them, is attempted to be given, by the Author of these pages, in his "Historical and Literary Account of the Formularies, Confessions of Faith, and Symbolic Books, of the Roman Catholic, Greek, and principal Protestant Churches."

THE SYLLOGE CONFESSIONUM printed at the Clarendon Press in 1804, contains theProfessio Fidei Tridentinæ, Confessio Helvetica, Augustana, Saxonica, Belgica."

"The Harmony of the Confessions of the Faith of the Christian and Reformed Churches" published at Cambridge in 1586, 8vo. attempts to reconcile the Confession of Augsburgh, the Confession of the Four Cities, the Confession of Bâsle, the first Confession of Helvetia; the Confession of Saxony, the Confession of Wirtemburgh, the French Confession, the English Confession, the latter Confession of Helvetia, the Belgic Confession, and that of Bohemia.

On the general subject,Walchius's Bibliotheca Theologica Selecta, may be usefully consulted.

REFERRED TO IN PAGE 188.

ON THE REUNION OF CHRISTIANS.

The attempts, made at different times for the re-union of Christians, are the subject of a learned and interesting work, published at Paris, with the title of "Histoire critique des projéts formés depuis trois cents ans pour la Reunion des communions Chretiennes, par M. Tabaraud, ancien Prétre de L'Oratoire, Paris, 1824." An excellent sketch of these attempts had been previously given byDoctor Mosheim, in his Ecclesiastical History, Cent. XVI. Ch. III. sect. 3. part 2. c. 1. and Cent. XVII. Cha. I. sect. 2. p. 1. To these publications the reader is referred:-the present Essay may be found to contain,

I. A general view of the attempts made after the Reformation, to unite the Lutheran and Calvinist churches:II. Some account of the Attempts made at different times by the sovereigns of France for the conversion of their protestant subjects:III. The correspondence of Bossuet and Leibniz, under the auspices of Lewis the Fourteenth, for the reunion of the Lutheran Churches to the Church of Rome:IV. Some account of an attempt made in the reign of George the First, to reunite the Church of England to the Church of Rome:V. And some general remarks on the Reunion of Christians.

I. A general view of the attempts made after the Reformation, to unite the Lutheran and Calvinist churches:

II. Some account of the Attempts made at different times by the sovereigns of France for the conversion of their protestant subjects:

III. The correspondence of Bossuet and Leibniz, under the auspices of Lewis the Fourteenth, for the reunion of the Lutheran Churches to the Church of Rome:

IV. Some account of an attempt made in the reign of George the First, to reunite the Church of England to the Church of Rome:

V. And some general remarks on the Reunion of Christians.

Attempts made to unite the Lutheran, and Calvinist Churches.

The great division of Protestant Churches is, into the Lutheran, and Calvinist communions. The Abbé Tabaraud relates in the work, which we have just cited, not fewer than fifteen different attempts to effect a reunion of their churches. In reading his account and that given by Mosheim of these attempts, the writer thinks that, on each side, there was something to commend and something to blame. It seems to him, that the Lutherans deserve credit for the open and explicit manner, in which, on these occasions, they propounded the tenets of their creed to the Calvinists; that the conduct of the Calvinists was more liberal and conciliating; but that, on the other hand, the conduct of the Lutherans towards the Calvinists, was generally repulsive, and sometimes deserving a much harsher name; while the conduct of the Calvinists, was sometimes chargeable, with ambiguity.

"It was deplorable," says Mosheim, (Cent. xvii. sect. 2. part 2. art. 3.) "to see two churches, which had discovered, an equal degree of pious zeal, and fortitude, in throwing off the despotic yoke of Rome, divided among themselves, and living in discords, that were highly detrimental, to the interests of religion, and the well-being of society. Hence, several eminent divines, and leading men, both among the Lutherans, and Calvinists, sought anxiously, after some method, of uniting the two churches, though divided in their opinions, in the bonds of Christian charity, and ecclesiastical communion. A competent knowledge, of human nature, and human passions, was sufficient, to persuade these wise, and pacific mediators, that a perfect uniformity in religious opinions, was not practicable, and that it would be entirely extravagant, to imagine that any of these communities, could ever be brought, to embrace universally, and without limitation, the doctrines of the other. They made it, therefore, their principal business, to persuade those, whose spirits were inflamed with the heat of controversy, that the points in debate between the two churches, were not essential, to true religion;-that the fundamental doctrines, of Christianity, were received, and professed, in both communions; and that the difference of opinion, between the contending parties, turned, either upon points of an abstruse, and incomprehensible nature, or upon matters of indifference, which neither tended, to make mankind wiser, or better, and in which the interests of genuine piety, were in no wise concerned. Those, who viewed things in this point of light, were obliged to acknowledge, that the diversity of opinions, between the two churches, was by no means, a sufficient reason, for their separation; and that of consequence, they were called, by the dictates of that gospel, which they both professed, to live, not only in the mutual exercise, of Christian charity, but also to enter, into the fraternal bonds, of church communion. The greatest part, of the reformed doctors, seemed disposed, to acknowledge, that the errors of the Lutherans, were not, of a momentous nature, nor of a pernicious tendency; and that the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, had not undergone, any remarkable alteration, in that communion; and thus, on their side, an important step, was made, towards peace, and union, between the two churches. But the greatest part of the Lutheran doctors declared, that they could not form, a like judgment, with respect, to the doctrine, of the Reformed churches; they maintained tenaciously, the importance of the points, which divided the two communions, and affirmed, that a considerable part of the controversy turned upon the fundamental principles, of all religion, and virtue. It is not at all surprising, that this steadiness and constancy of the Lutherans, was branded by the opposite party, with the epithets, of morose obstinacy, supercilious arrogance, and such like odious denominations. The Lutherans, were not behind hand with their adversaries, in acrimony, of style; they recriminated with vehemence, and charged their accusers with instances of misconduct, different in kind, but equally condemnable. They reproached them with having dealt disingenuously, by disguising, under ambiguous expressions, the real doctrine of the Reformed churches; they observed further, that their adversaries, notwithstanding their consummate prudence and circumspection, gave plain proofs, on many occasions, that their propensity to a reconciliation, between the two churches, arose from views of private interest, rather than from a zeal for the public good."

"It was deplorable," says Mosheim, (Cent. xvii. sect. 2. part 2. art. 3.) "to see two churches, which had discovered, an equal degree of pious zeal, and fortitude, in throwing off the despotic yoke of Rome, divided among themselves, and living in discords, that were highly detrimental, to the interests of religion, and the well-being of society. Hence, several eminent divines, and leading men, both among the Lutherans, and Calvinists, sought anxiously, after some method, of uniting the two churches, though divided in their opinions, in the bonds of Christian charity, and ecclesiastical communion. A competent knowledge, of human nature, and human passions, was sufficient, to persuade these wise, and pacific mediators, that a perfect uniformity in religious opinions, was not practicable, and that it would be entirely extravagant, to imagine that any of these communities, could ever be brought, to embrace universally, and without limitation, the doctrines of the other. They made it, therefore, their principal business, to persuade those, whose spirits were inflamed with the heat of controversy, that the points in debate between the two churches, were not essential, to true religion;-that the fundamental doctrines, of Christianity, were received, and professed, in both communions; and that the difference of opinion, between the contending parties, turned, either upon points of an abstruse, and incomprehensible nature, or upon matters of indifference, which neither tended, to make mankind wiser, or better, and in which the interests of genuine piety, were in no wise concerned. Those, who viewed things in this point of light, were obliged to acknowledge, that the diversity of opinions, between the two churches, was by no means, a sufficient reason, for their separation; and that of consequence, they were called, by the dictates of that gospel, which they both professed, to live, not only in the mutual exercise, of Christian charity, but also to enter, into the fraternal bonds, of church communion. The greatest part, of the reformed doctors, seemed disposed, to acknowledge, that the errors of the Lutherans, were not, of a momentous nature, nor of a pernicious tendency; and that the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, had not undergone, any remarkable alteration, in that communion; and thus, on their side, an important step, was made, towards peace, and union, between the two churches. But the greatest part of the Lutheran doctors declared, that they could not form, a like judgment, with respect, to the doctrine, of the Reformed churches; they maintained tenaciously, the importance of the points, which divided the two communions, and affirmed, that a considerable part of the controversy turned upon the fundamental principles, of all religion, and virtue. It is not at all surprising, that this steadiness and constancy of the Lutherans, was branded by the opposite party, with the epithets, of morose obstinacy, supercilious arrogance, and such like odious denominations. The Lutherans, were not behind hand with their adversaries, in acrimony, of style; they recriminated with vehemence, and charged their accusers with instances of misconduct, different in kind, but equally condemnable. They reproached them with having dealt disingenuously, by disguising, under ambiguous expressions, the real doctrine of the Reformed churches; they observed further, that their adversaries, notwithstanding their consummate prudence and circumspection, gave plain proofs, on many occasions, that their propensity to a reconciliation, between the two churches, arose from views of private interest, rather than from a zeal for the public good."

It is observable that Mosheim applies these observations to a late stage of the reformation, when much of its first violence had subsided.

The nearest approach[080]to a reunion, between any Protestant churches, seems to be that, which took place at Sendomer, in the year 1570.

Attempts for a Reunion of the Calvinist Churches to the See of Rome.

Having thus summarily noticed, the unsuccessful attempts, to effect an union, between the Lutheran, and Calvinist churches, we proceed to a similar summary mention of the attempts, equally unsuccessful, to effect the reunion of the Calvinists, to the church of Rome, which were made,

1st, during the reign of Henry the Fourth:2dly, during the reign of Lewis the Thirteenth: and3dly, during the reign of Lewis the Fourteenth:4thly, we shall afterwards notice, the Revocation of the edict of Nantes, and the complete restoration of the protestants of France, to their civil rights, in the reign of Lewis the Eighteenth.

1st, during the reign of Henry the Fourth:

2dly, during the reign of Lewis the Thirteenth: and

3dly, during the reign of Lewis the Fourteenth:

4thly, we shall afterwards notice, the Revocation of the edict of Nantes, and the complete restoration of the protestants of France, to their civil rights, in the reign of Lewis the Eighteenth.

An attempt to reunite the Calvinists to the church of Rome was made at the celebrated Conference held at Poissi in 1561. In the work which we have cited, the Abbé Tabaraud gives a short and clear account of this conference. It failed of success, and a long civil war of religion ensued. It was closed by the conversion ofHenry the Fourthto the Roman Catholic religion. He was no sooner quietly seated on the throne, than he conceived the arduous, but certainly noble project of pacifying the religious contests of the world. It appears that he was induced to entertain hopes of the success of this measure, by the assurances given him by the Calvinist ministers, when his change of religion, was in agitation, that salvation might be obtained in the church of Rome; and from his expectation of finding a spirit of conciliation, and concession, in the see of Rome.

"I have heard, from persons of distinction," says Grotius[081], "that Henry the Fourth declared that he had great hopes of procuring for the King of England, and the other protestant princes, who were his allies, conditions, which they could not honorably refuse, if they had any real wish of returning to the unity of the church; and that he had once an intention of employing bishops of his own kingdom on this project; but that this project failed by his death."

"I have heard, from persons of distinction," says Grotius[081], "that Henry the Fourth declared that he had great hopes of procuring for the King of England, and the other protestant princes, who were his allies, conditions, which they could not honorably refuse, if they had any real wish of returning to the unity of the church; and that he had once an intention of employing bishops of his own kingdom on this project; but that this project failed by his death."

It is said, that with these views he had sent forIsaac Casaubon, a protestant divine of equal learning and moderation, and appointed him his librarian; and that he intended confidentially employing him in preparing means for the success of the measure, and smoothing the obstacles which might impede its progress. Grotius[082]mentions, as a saying of Casaubon, that "the catholics of France had a juster way of thinking than the ministers of Charenton:" these were the most rigid of the French Hugonot ministers. It is observable that the French government always considered the Hugonots of a much more refractory disposition than the Lutherans.

The pacific views of Henry the Fourth, were terminated by his decease. The capture of la Rochelle by the arms ofLewis the XIIIth, was a fatal blow to the political consequence of the Protestant party in France. Cardinal Richelieu immediately set on foot a project, for the general conversion, of the body: two persons, of very different characters, were employed by him, in this measure; Father Joseph, a capuchin friar, the confident, of all the cardinal's political and private schemes, and Father P. Dulaurens, an oratorian, who lived in retirement, wholly absorbed in the exercises of religion. They began the work of reunion by holding frequent conferences, on an amicable footing, with several of the protestant ministers; and it was resolved, that, with the permission of the pope, and the authority of the king, an assembly, should be convened, of ecclesiastics of each communion. Father Dulaurens, recommended that the intended communications with the ministers, should not take place, till they reached, the capital; but, the cardinal, thought it more advisable, that the ministers, should be separately informed, of the project, before they left the provinces. It was accordingly communicated to them, and favourably received, by the ministers, of Languedoc, and Normandy, but met with an unfavourable reception, from the ministers of Sedan. It was resolved, that the assembly, should meet, and begin their deliberations, with the differences in the opinions, of the two churches, respecting the Sacraments. Father Dulaurens recommended, that for some time, at least, the Bible, even in the Calvinist version, of Olivétan, should be the only book appealed to, on either side, as authority: but the Cardinal insisted, on a resort to tradition. Grotius mentions that in several articles, (as communion under both kinds, and the invocation of saints), the Cardinal was willing, that concessions, should be made to the Protestants; and suggested, that, as a medium, to reconcile them to the Pope, a patriarchate should be established, in France, and he himself, be the first patriarch[083].

Notwithstanding the general loftiness, and overbearing nature, of his manners, it appears, particularly from M. de Rullhiêres[084](6.) that the Cardinal, acted on this occasion, with great moderation, and recommended to his royal master, a similar line of moderation, in all his conduct, towards his Protestant subjects.

The Cardinal's project, was suspended, by his decease; and resumed, underLewis the Fourteenth. In 1662, a plan, drawn up by M. le Blanc de Beaulieu, a professor of Divinity, at Sedan, singularly esteemed, both by the Roman Catholics, and Protestants, by which the essential articles, in dispute, were reduced to a small number, was adopted, by the Court, to serve as the basis of discussion. It was resolved, that different synods of Protestant ministers, should be convened; that these, should be composed, of ministers of known moderation, and pacific views, and the articles, drawn up by M. le Blanc de Beaulieu, presented to them. Three years were employed, in negotiations for effecting this project: several ministers in the lower Languedoc, and the Isle of France, expressed themselves, in terms favourable, to the measure, but the synod of Charenton, took the alarm, and the project, was abandoned.

The Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, a measure equally unwise, and unjust, too soon followed. It is more to be attributed, to his ministers and advisers, than to Lewis the Fourteenth himself. From theEclaircissemens Historiquesof M. de Rullhiêres, and the life of Bossuet, by M. Baussét[085], it seems evident, that Lewis the Fourteenth, had been induced, to believe, that the number of Protestants was much smaller; that the conversions of them, would be much more rapid, general, and sincere; and that the measures, for hastening their conversion, would be much less violent than they really were. It is also due, to the monarch, to add, that from the authors, whom we have cited, it is evident, that when he began to perceive the true state, of the transaction, though from false principles of honour, and policy, he would not revoke the edict, he wished it not to be put into great activity, and checked the forwardness, of the Intendants general in its execution.

It is whimsical, (if on so serious a subject such a word may be used), that the dragonâde, or employment of the dragoon troops, in forcing the conversion, of the Hugonots, was owing to the wish of Louvois, the minister, of Lewis the Fourteenth, to become himself, a missionary. Observing how much the apparent success, of the missionaries, recommended them, to Lewis the Fourteenth, he began to consider them as dangerous rivals for the favour of his royal master, and determined, therefore, to become himself, a principal performer. With this view, he instituted the dragoon missions, and thus brought a material part, of the work of conversion, into the war department.

The death of Lewis, and the known disposition of the Regent, appeared to the Protestant party, in France, to afford a proper opportunity of recovering their rights. Duclos, in hisMémoires secréts sur les regnes de Louis XIV. et de Louis XV., says, that the Regent himself wished to restore the Protestants, to their civil rights, but was dissuaded by his council. Still, he seldom permitted the edicts against them to be executed; and speaking generally, the Protestants seem to have suffered no active persecution in any part of the reign of Lewis, the XVth. One intolerable grievance, however, they unquestionably suffered in every part of it. Their religious principles did not permit them to be married by a Roman Catholic priest, in the manner prescribed by the law of the state, and that law did not recognize the legal validity of a marriage, celebrated in any other form. The consequence was, that in the eye of the law, the marriage of Protestants was a mere concubinage, and the offspring of it illegitimate. To his immortal honour,Lewis the XVIth, by his edict of the 17th of November, 1787, accorded to all his Non-catholic subjects the full and complete enjoyment of all the rights of his Roman-catholic subjects. On a division in the Parliament, this edict was registered by a majority of 96 votes against 16.

The persecution of the Hugonots in consequence of the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, was condemned by the greatest men in France. M. d'Aguesseau, the father of the celebrated chancellor, resigned his office of Intendant of Languedoc rather than remain a witness of it: his son repeatedly mentions it with abhorrence. Fénélon, Flechier, and Bossuet,[086]confessedly the ornaments of the Gallican church, lamented it. To the utmost of their power, they prevented the execution of the edict, and lessened its severities, when they could not prevent them. Most sincerely lamenting and condemning the outrages committed by the Roman Catholics against the Protestants at Nismes, as violations of the law of God and man, but doubting of the nature and extent, which some have attributed to them, the writer of these pages begs leave to refer to the sermon preached on them by the Reverend James Archer, a Roman Catholic priest, and printed for Booker, in Bond-street, by the desire of two Roman Catholic congregations, as expressing the doctrine of the Roman Catholic church, and of all real christians on heretics and the persecution of heretics.

The Correspondence of Bossuet and Leibniz, under the auspices of Lewis the XIVth, for the Reunion of the Lutheran Protestants to the Roman Catholic Church.

This correspondence forms one of the most interesting events in the life of Bossuet; the letters, of which it consists, and the other written documents, which relate to it, are highly interesting. We shall attempt to present our readers with a short account-

1st. Of the circumstances which led to this correspondence;2ndly. Of the Project of Reunion, delivered by Molanus, a Lutheran Divine, and Bossuet's sentiments on that Project;3dly. Of the intervention of Leibniz in the negotiation; and4thly. Of the Project suggested by Bossuet, and the principal reasons, by which he contended for its reception.

1st. Of the circumstances which led to this correspondence;

2ndly. Of the Project of Reunion, delivered by Molanus, a Lutheran Divine, and Bossuet's sentiments on that Project;

3dly. Of the intervention of Leibniz in the negotiation; and

4thly. Of the Project suggested by Bossuet, and the principal reasons, by which he contended for its reception.

It appears that, towards the 17th century, the Emperor Leopold, and several sovereign princes in Germany, conceived a project of re-uniting the Roman Catholic and Lutheran churches. The Duke of Brunswick, who had recently embraced the Roman Catholic religion, and published hisFifty Reasons for his conversion, (once a popular work of controversy), and the Duke of Hanover, the father of the first prince of the illustrious house, which now fills the throne of England, were the original promoters of the attempt. It was generally approved; and the mention of it at the Diet of the Empire was favourably received. Some communications upon it took place between the Emperor and the ducal Princes: and with all their knowledge, several conferences were held upon the subject, between certain distinguished Roman Catholic and Protestant Divines. In these, the Bishop of Neustadt, and Molanus, the Abbot of Lokkum, took the lead. The first had been consecrated Bishop of Tina in Bosnia, then under the dominion of the Turks, with Ordinary Jurisdiction over some parts of the Turkish territories. His conduct had recommended him to Innocent the XIth, and that pope had directed him to visit the Protestant states in Germany, and inform him of their actual dispositions in respect to the Church of Rome. In consequence of this mission, he became known to the Emperor, who appointed him to the See of Neustadt, in the neighbourhood of Vienna. Molanus, was Director of the Protestant Churches and Consistories of Hanover. Both were admirably calculated for the office intended them, on this occasion. Each possessed the confidence of his own party, and was esteemed by the other; each was profoundly versed in the matters in dispute; each possessed good sense, moderation, and conciliating manners; and each had the success of the business at heart, with a fixed purpose, that nothing, but a real difference on some essential article of doctrine, should frustrate the project.

The effect of the first conferences was so promising, that the Emperor and the two Princes resolved, that they should be conducted in a manner more regular, and more likely to bring the object of them to a conclusion. With this view, the business was formally entrusted by both the princes to Molanus alone, and the Emperor published a rescript, dated the 20th March, 1691, by which he gave the Bishop of Neustadt full authority to treat, on all matters of religion, with the states, communities, and individuals of the empire, reserving to the ecclesiastical and imperial powers, their right to confirm the acts of the Bishop, as they should judge adviseable. Under these auspicious circumstances, the conference between the Bishop of Neustadt and Molanus began.

But, before the events which we have mentioned took place, a correspondence on the subject of a general reunion between Catholics and Protestants had been carried on for some time, between Pelisson and Leibniz. The former held a considerable rank among the French writers, who adorned the reign of Lewis the Fourteenth; the latter was eminently distinguished in the literary world. In the exact sciences, he was inferior to Newton alone; in metaphysics, he had no superior; in general learning, he had scarcely a rival. He had recommended himself to the Brunswick family, by three volumes, which he had recently published, on the Antiquities of that illustrious House; and was then engaged in the investigation of its Italian descent, and early German shoots. The result of it, under the title ofOrigines Guelphicæ, was published, after his decease, by Scheidius, and is considered to be a perfect model of genealogical history. He was also thoroughly conversant in the theological disputes of the times; and in all the questions of dogma, or history, which enter into them.

His correspondence with Pelisson, came to the knowledge of Louisa, Princess Palatine, and Abbess of Maubrusson. She was a daughter of Frederick, the Elector, and Count Palatine of the Rhine, and a sister, of the Duchess of Hanover. In early life, she had been converted to the Roman Catholic religion, and had the conversion of her sister, very much at heart. With this view, she sent to her, the correspondence between Leibniz and Pelisson, and received from her an account of what was passing, between the Bishop of Neustadt, and Molanus. Both the ladies were anxious, to promote the measure, and that Bossuet should take in it, the leading part, on the side of the Catholics. This was mentioned to Lewis the Fourteenth, and had his approbation. The Emperor and both the Princes, by all of whom Bossuet, was personally esteemed, equally approved of it, and it was finally settled that Bossuet and Leibniz, should be joined, to the Bishops of Neustadt, and Molanus, and that the correspondence with Bossuet, should pass through the hands of Madame de Brinon, who acted, as secretary to the Abbess of Maubrusson, and is celebrated, by the writers of the times, for her wit and dexterity in business. Thus the matter assumed, a still more regular form, and much was expected from the acknowledged talents, learning, and moderation of the actors in it, and their patrons.

The conferences between the Bishop of Neustadt, and Molanus continued for seven months, and ended in their agreeing on 12 articles, to serve for the basis of the discussion, on the terms of the reunion.

The Bishop of Neustadt, communicated these articles to Bossuet. He seems, to have approved of them generally, but to have thought, that some alteration in them, was adviseable. This being mentioned to Molanus, he published hisCogitationes Privatæ, a profound and conciliating dissertation. Without entering into any discussion, on the points in dispute, between the churches, he suggested in it a kind of truce, during which, there should be ecclesiastical communion between them: the Lutherans, were to acknowledge the Pope, as the first of Bishops, in order, and dignity: the Church of Rome, was to receive the Lutherans, as her children, without exacting from them, any retractation of their alledged errors, or any renunciation, of the articles in their creed, condemned by the Council of Trent. The anathemas of that council, were to be suspended, and a general council was to be convened, in which the Protestants were to have a deliberative voice: the sentence of that council, was to be definitive, and, in the mean time, the members of each party, were to treat the members of the other, as brethren, whose errors, however great they might appear, were to be tolerated, from motives of peace, and in consideration, of their engagements to abandon them, if the council should pronounce against them. To show the probability of a final accommodation, Molanus notices, in his Dissertation, several points, in which one party imputed to the other errors, not justly chargeable on them; several, on which they disputed, merely for want of rightly understanding each other; and several, in which the dispute was of words only.

It appears that the Bishop of Neustadt, communicated this dissertation, to Bossuet, and that Bossuet was delighted, with the good sense, candour, and true spirit of conciliation, which it displayed. In his letters he frequently mentions the author, and always in terms, Of the highest praise. His own language was equally moderate and conciliating.

"The Council of Trent," he says in one of his letters, "is our stay; but we shall not use it to prejudice the cause. This would be, to take for granted, what is in dispute between us. We shall deal more fairly with our opponents. We shall make the council serve, for a statement, and explanation, of our doctrines. Thus, we shall come to an explanation, on those points, in which either of us imputes to the other, what he does not believe, and in which we dispute, only because we misconceive each other. This may lead us far; forthe Abbot of Lokkum, has actually conciliated the points so essential, of Justification, and the Eucharist: nothing is wanting in him, on that side, but that he should be avowed. Why should we not hope to conclude, in the same manner, disputes, less difficult, and of less importance? Cela se peut pousser si avant, que M. l'Abbé de Lokkum, a concilié, actuellement les points si essentiels, de la justification, et du sacrifice de l'Eucharistie, et il ne lui manque de ce coté la, que de se faire avouer. Pourquoi ne pas espérer de finir, par les mêmes moyens, des disputes, moins difficiles, et moins importantes?"

"The Council of Trent," he says in one of his letters, "is our stay; but we shall not use it to prejudice the cause. This would be, to take for granted, what is in dispute between us. We shall deal more fairly with our opponents. We shall make the council serve, for a statement, and explanation, of our doctrines. Thus, we shall come to an explanation, on those points, in which either of us imputes to the other, what he does not believe, and in which we dispute, only because we misconceive each other. This may lead us far; forthe Abbot of Lokkum, has actually conciliated the points so essential, of Justification, and the Eucharist: nothing is wanting in him, on that side, but that he should be avowed. Why should we not hope to conclude, in the same manner, disputes, less difficult, and of less importance? Cela se peut pousser si avant, que M. l'Abbé de Lokkum, a concilié, actuellement les points si essentiels, de la justification, et du sacrifice de l'Eucharistie, et il ne lui manque de ce coté la, que de se faire avouer. Pourquoi ne pas espérer de finir, par les mêmes moyens, des disputes, moins difficiles, et moins importantes?"

With these rational and conciliatory dispositions, Bossuet, and Molanus, proceeded. But, after this stage of the business, Molanus disappears, and Leibniz comes on the scene.

A Letter, written by Bossuet to M^me de Brinon, having been communicated by her to Leibniz, opened the correspondence between him and Bossuet. In that letter, Bossuet declared explicitly, that the Church of Rome, was ready, to make concessions, on points of discipline, and to explain doctrines, but would make no concession in respect to defined articles of faith; and, in particular, would make no such concession, in respect to any which had been defined by the Council of Trent. Leibniz's Letter to M^me de Brinon, in answer to this communication, is very important. He expresses himself in these terms;

"The Bishop of Meaux says,"1st. That the Project delivered to the Bishop of Neustadt, does not appear to him quite sufficient;"2dly. That it is, nevertheless, very useful, as every thing must have its beginning:"3dly. That Rome will never relax from any point of doctrine, defined by the church, and cannot capitulate, in respect to any such article;"4thly. That the doctrine, defined in the Council of Trent, is received in and out of France by all Roman Catholics;"5thly, That satisfaction may be given to Protestants, in respect to certain points of discipline, or in the way of explanation, and that this had been already done in an useful manner, in some points, mentioned in the Project of the Bishop of Neustadt."These are the material propositions, in the letter of the Bishop of Meaux, and I believe all these propositions true. Neither the Bishop of Neustadt, nor those who negotiated with them, make any opposition to them. There is nothing in them, which is not conformable to the sentiments of those persons. The third of them in particular, which might be thought, an obstacle, to these Projects of Accommodation, could not be unknown to them; one may even say, that they built on it."

"The Bishop of Meaux says,

"1st. That the Project delivered to the Bishop of Neustadt, does not appear to him quite sufficient;

"2dly. That it is, nevertheless, very useful, as every thing must have its beginning:

"3dly. That Rome will never relax from any point of doctrine, defined by the church, and cannot capitulate, in respect to any such article;

"4thly. That the doctrine, defined in the Council of Trent, is received in and out of France by all Roman Catholics;

"5thly, That satisfaction may be given to Protestants, in respect to certain points of discipline, or in the way of explanation, and that this had been already done in an useful manner, in some points, mentioned in the Project of the Bishop of Neustadt.

"These are the material propositions, in the letter of the Bishop of Meaux, and I believe all these propositions true. Neither the Bishop of Neustadt, nor those who negotiated with them, make any opposition to them. There is nothing in them, which is not conformable to the sentiments of those persons. The third of them in particular, which might be thought, an obstacle, to these Projects of Accommodation, could not be unknown to them; one may even say, that they built on it."

It seems difficult to deny, that, in this stage of the business, much had been gained to the cause of reunion. The parties were come to a complete understanding on the important articles of Justification, and the Eucharist; and it was admitted, both by Leibniz, and Molanus, that, in their view of the concern, an accommodation might be effected, between the Roman Catholic, and Lutheran churches, though the former, retained all her defined doctrines, and, in particular, all her doctrines, defined by the Council of Trent. The question then was, what should be done in respect to the remaining articles in difference between the churches? It is to be wished, that it had been left to Bossuet, and Molanus, to settle them, in the way of amicable explanation, in which they had settled, the two important articles, which we have mentioned. It is evident, from the passages, which we have cited, from Bossuet, that it was his wish, that the business should proceed on that plan, and that he had hopes of its success. Unfortunately, the business took, another direction: Leibniz proclaimed, that after every possible explanation should be given, the Lutheran church would, still retain, some articles, contrary to the defined doctrines, of the Church of Rome, and anathematized, by the Council of Trent. To remove the final effect of this objection, Leibniz held out Molanus's first project, that the Lutherans should express a general acquiescence, in the authority of the church, and promise obedience, to the decisions of a General Council, to be called, for the purpose of pronouncing, on these points; and that, in consequence of these advances, on their part, the anathemas of the Council of Trent, should be suspended, and the Lutherans received, provisionally, within the pale, of the Catholic church. To bring over Bossuet to this plan, he exerted great eloquence, and displayed, no common learning.

But the eloquence, and learning, of Leibniz, were without effect. In language, equally temperate and firm, Bossuet, adhered to his text, that in matters of discipline, or any other matter, distinct from faith, the Church of Rome, would show the utmost indulgence to the Lutherans; but that, on articles of faith, and specifically, on those propounded by the Council of Trent, there could be no compromise. This, however, he confined to articles of faith alone: and even on articles of faith, he wished to consult the feelings of Protestants, as much as possible. He offered them every fair explanation of the tenets of the council; he required from them no retractation, of their own tenets:

"Molanus," he says, "will not allow retractation to be mentioned. It may be dispensed with; it will be sufficient, that the parties acknowledge, the truth, by way of declaration or explanation. To this, the Symbolical Books, give a clear opening, as appears by the passages, which have been produced from them, and will appear, by other passages, which may be produced from them."

"Molanus," he says, "will not allow retractation to be mentioned. It may be dispensed with; it will be sufficient, that the parties acknowledge, the truth, by way of declaration or explanation. To this, the Symbolical Books, give a clear opening, as appears by the passages, which have been produced from them, and will appear, by other passages, which may be produced from them."

If Bossuet was thus considerate, in what regarded faith, it will easily be supposed, how indulgent his sentiments were, in respect to all, that merely regarded discipline. A complete confession of faith, being once obtained from the Lutherans, he was willing, to allow them, if they required it, communion under both kinds; that their Bishops, should retain their Sees; and that, where there was no Bishop, and the whole body of the people, was Protestant, under the care, of a superintendant,thatsuperintendant, should be consecrated their Bishop; that, where there was a Catholic Bishop, and a considerable part of the diocese, was Lutheran, the superintendant, should be consecrated priest, and invested with rank, and office, that the Lutheran ministers, should be consecrated priests; that provision should be made for their support; that such of their bishops, and ministers, as were married, might retain their wives, and that the consciences of those, who held possessions of the church, should be quieted, except in respect, to hospitals, whose possessions he thought, could not conscientiously be withheld, from the poor objects of their foundations; and that every other arrangement should be made, by the church and state, which would be agreeable, to the feelings, and prejudices, of their new brethren.

Such were the advances made by Bossuet; and much discussion on them, took place, between him, and Leibniz. It continued ten years. They are very learned, and a scholar will read them with delight; but, unfortunately, they rather retarded, than promoted, their object. The real business ended, when Molanus quitted the scene. We shall close this article, with the following extract from the last letter but one, written by Bossuet, on the subject. It is addressed to Leibniz, and bears date the 12th August, 1701, ten years, after his first letter, on it was written:


Back to IndexNext